Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » JC getting better at PMQs but still work in progress

123468

Comments

  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,028
    antifrank said:
    Beware the quiet ones
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Voting now
  • Options
    flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    Barnesian said:

    I'm watching Corbyn's face. He isn't smiling. He's like a serious old schoolmaster. I don't think he is happy with McDonnell.

    You mean he has actually turned up?
  • Options
    ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    John_M said:

    Scott_P said:

    @paulwaugh: Lab whips cautioning not to get too excited if 45 abstentions tonight; 15 MPs 'slipped' to be away. But still cd be 30 'active' abstentions

    Hang on, wasn't this meant to be a three-line whip? Or don't Labour do that kind of thing anymore?
    They probably asked JC what it meant
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,028
    Hey! I made a hilariously funny wisecrack and the moderator deleted it!! How come???
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,021
    isam said:

    Hey! I made a hilariously funny wisecrack and the moderator deleted it!! How come???

    Too funny, perhaps? :D
  • Options
    Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,060
    edited October 2015
    isam said:

    Hey! I made a hilariously funny wisecrack and the moderator deleted it!! How come???

    It made me smile and my retort went too!

    Are you not banned however from interacting with almost as many people as 'him'... roger's hero.
  • Options
    AndyJS said:

    I suppose this is the same sort of thing as Sweden ostensibly having one of the highest rates of rape and sexual harassment in the world. Of course that's nonsense, it just reflects the fact that they take reporting it much more seriously than elsewhere.

    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Dair said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Revenue £4 billion
    Cost of Sales Just over £4 Bn
    General overheads £600 M
    "Exceptional items" £650m

    Other stuff

    etc...

    Loss for the year 1.35Bn;
    Change in equity -1.3Bn.

    Equity at yr End -£66 M.

    The new MD (Rupert Soames, a grandson of Winston Churchill and a very well respected figure) is doing the standard thing of writing off vast amounts of historic problems in one go.
    Only in the UK could the Managing Director of the biggest beneficiary of government largesse be the brother/cousin of at least two MPs and the Grandon/Nephew/Son of yet more.
    I seriously doubt that only in the UK could something like that be the case.
    I don't think anyone who is grousing about the exceptional level of UK corruption has ever been to France, Spain, Italy, Portugal...never mind Russia!
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index#/media/File:Transparency_international_2014.png
    Surpisingly (to my mind anyway) Norway is rife with claims of nepotism with many of the top politicians and civil servants coming from a few Oslo based families.
    Actually no. It is just that in a small country like Norway three or four families who appear to have a number of members in important positions gets noticed. The Gerhardsens, Stoltenbergs and Harlems - all Labour, seem to dominate left wing politics and the high positions of office.

    That said, it is a case of perception rather than fact. If you compared it to the UK political dynasties then the Norwegians are rank amateurs.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,711

    wow - that's one way to take the focus off the economy...

    PoliticsHome ✔ @politicshome
    Labour could back unilateral disarmament, says Shadow Defence Sec http://polho.me/1k4Uk6l pic.twitter.com/wC6xsXWQOa

    Labour could burn the Union Jack right now and use the ashes as toilet paper live on camera - they won't drop any further in the polls.

    People are registering protest against the government and what it's doing, and nature abhors a vacuum. Of course, that's very different to voting for Corbyn in GE2020.
  • Options
    ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    Danny565 said:

    kle4 said:

    But on the other hand, I find it hard to conceive of a situation wherein Corbyn's Labour would ever consider a reduction in spending as acceptable.

    Trident :p
    Hold on - that nice Uncle Len would surely send them to bed early for expressing such thoughts.
  • Options
    DairDair Posts: 6,108
    What is a good result for Corbyn, There's about 70 votes automagically No (SNP, DUP, Green, Plaid). What figure is untenable for him? Below 200 Nos? Below 150?
  • Options
    flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    Scott_P said:

    @rustinpeace00: McDonnell completely falling to pieces at the box. I genuinely cannot believe that this is what remains of Labour in 2015. #FiscalCharter

    Is he blinking a lot?
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,012
    antifrank said:
    They won't switch while Corbyn leads Labour (at any rate, they won't switch to Labour).
  • Options
    ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    DavidL said:

    If this was a boxing match it would have been stopped.

    There is something almost too cruel in this.

    Can't see it myself. Harmless fun, very instructive for the children
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,814
    It's been a while since I watched an economic debate live. This is just nonsense. These people know and understand less than my barber.

    I know things have always been bad, but this bad!?

    We may be a bit fucked!
  • Options
    flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    Scott_P said:

    Osborne quoting McDonnell.

    The point about rubbishing McDonnell is he is a ready made proxy for Corbyn. There is no need to get deep down and biblical with Corbyn when you can unhinge him by defenestrating his chosen closest ally. And of course the Tories would want to string Corbyn along as long as possible.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,028
    edited October 2015

    isam said:

    Hey! I made a hilariously funny wisecrack and the moderator deleted it!! How come???

    It made me smile and my retort went too!

    Are you not banned however from interacting with almost as many people as 'him'... roger's hero.
    Ah at least it got an audience!!!

    Reminds me of the time I got a whole thread pulled for tricking someone... Ha ha

    I'm banned from interacting with about half a dozen... The apocalypse and flightpath
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,021
    isam said:

    isam said:

    Hey! I made a hilariously funny wisecrack and the moderator deleted it!! How come???

    It made me smile and my retort went too!

    Are you not banned however from interacting with almost as many people as 'him'... roger's hero.
    Ah at least it got an audience!!!

    Reminds me if the time I got a whole thread pulled for tricking someone... Ha ha

    I'm banned from interacting with about half a dozen... The apocalypse and flightpath
    Half a dozen, yet only two names.... heh ;)
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    They won't switch while Corbyn leads Labour (at any rate, they won't switch to Labour).

    That sounds a bit complacent. If Osborne finally has some money by, say, 2018, he better give it back to this group.
  • Options
    ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    kle4 said:

    Some would argue there are matches that are stopped far too early, when the boxer under a flurry of blows was in fact fine and would have rallied if the refs hadn't called it too soon.

    Yes, Labour are going to rally at the end of this debate...
    Surely what matters is how many are unhappy enough to do something about it, and whether this debate will impact on that number? If the situation does not get worse, then they have potential to rally as a party. I don't say it is likely, merely curious if things will actually get worse, or if they are treading water and thus giving themselves a chance later.
    You're surely not suggesting that this is Ali vs Foreman all over again?
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Government wins the vote
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,028
    RobD said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Hey! I made a hilariously funny wisecrack and the moderator deleted it!! How come???

    It made me smile and my retort went too!

    Are you not banned however from interacting with almost as many people as 'him'... roger's hero.
    Ah at least it got an audience!!!

    Reminds me if the time I got a whole thread pulled for tricking someone... Ha ha

    I'm banned from interacting with about half a dozen... The apocalypse and flightpath
    Half a dozen, yet only two names.... heh ;)
    Oh I meant to add 'among others' obviously!
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,086

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    kle4 said:

    Some would argue there are matches that are stopped far too early, when the boxer under a flurry of blows was in fact fine and would have rallied if the refs hadn't called it too soon.

    Yes, Labour are going to rally at the end of this debate...
    Surely what matters is how many are unhappy enough to do something about it, and whether this debate will impact on that number? If the situation does not get worse, then they have potential to rally as a party. I don't say it is likely, merely curious if things will actually get worse, or if they are treading water and thus giving themselves a chance later.
    You're surely not suggesting that this is Ali vs Foreman all over again?
    I never rule anything out completely, but I'm not anticipating that. Just picking at an analogy.
  • Options
    Harsh but entirely fair

    Mark Wallace @wallaceme
    Absolute must-watch - the whole interview with @RichardBurgon. He may as well have arrived in a clown car. https://twitter.com/stephenpollard/status/654377154541670400
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,021
    320-258
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @TheRedRag: The ayes have it by 62. #FiscalCharter
    Aye 320
    No 258
    Not bad with a government majority of just 12.
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,008
    Majority of 62.

    So about 30-40 Labour MPs have abstained.
  • Options
    flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    edited October 2015
    Dair said:

    kle4 said:

    DavidL said:

    If this was a boxing match it would have been stopped.
    .

    Some would argue there are matches that are stopped far too early, when the boxer under a flurry of blows was in fact fine and would have rallied if the refs hadn't called it too soon.
    I think boxing is a bad analogy.

    This is more of a Ronda Rousey bout.
    No one is trying to suggest that McDonnell is trying to rope a dope are they?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,018
    Any Labour MPs go through the Gov't lobby in the end ?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,021
    edited October 2015
    SeanT said:

    Harsh but entirely fair

    Mark Wallace @wallaceme
    Absolute must-watch - the whole interview with @RichardBurgon. He may as well have arrived in a clown car. twitter.com/stephenpollard/status/654377154541670400 …

    This brief interview probably has the most embarrassment-per-second* I have ever seen.

    EPS* - a new metric invented exclusively for the Corbyn Era.
    Apt for certain elements of the Miliband era too, Lucy Powell for starters.

    Edit: had to skip some parts of the video.. reminds me of watching the office. Ugh.
  • Options
    HaroldOHaroldO Posts: 1,185
    SeanT said:

    Harsh but entirely fair

    Mark Wallace @wallaceme
    Absolute must-watch - the whole interview with @RichardBurgon. He may as well have arrived in a clown car. https://twitter.com/stephenpollard/status/654377154541670400

    This brief interview probably has the most embarrassment-per-second* I have ever seen.

    EPS* - a new metric invented exclusively for the Corbyn Era.
    Those eyebrows are haunting.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Normally The Apprentice is the most cringeworthy thing on TV, but it will have to go some to match that debate
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,443
    God Labour MPs are a bunch of pathetic wooses. Do they not even have a sense of self preservation?

    They really deserve what is coming to them.
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited October 2015
    Barnesian said:

    Majority of 62.

    So about 30-40 Labour MPs have abstained.

    Deselection o'clock.

    The govt would have been defeated if all Lab MPs did their job.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,086
    Danny565 said:

    Barnesian said:

    Majority of 62.

    So about 30-40 Labour MPs have abstained.

    Deselection o'clock.
    Oh come on, just for abstaining? That's not even a real rebellion.
  • Options
    flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    DavidL said:

    God Labour MPs are a bunch of pathetic wooses. Do they not even have a sense of self preservation?

    They really deserve what is coming to them.

    They have blown their chance I think. Now there will be factionalism within the factions.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,018
    SeanT said:

    Harsh but entirely fair

    Mark Wallace @wallaceme
    Absolute must-watch - the whole interview with @RichardBurgon. He may as well have arrived in a clown car. https://twitter.com/stephenpollard/status/654377154541670400

    This brief interview probably has the most embarrassment-per-second* I have ever seen.

    EPS* - a new metric invented exclusively for the Corbyn Era.
    2:10 - Ending corporate welfare.

    Is there another U-turn coming on tax credits ?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,018
    Danny565 said:

    Barnesian said:

    Majority of 62.

    So about 30-40 Labour MPs have abstained.

    Deselection o'clock.

    The govt would have been defeated if all Lab MPs did their job.
    Doubt that - pairings ?

    Also they're 65 short, not 40.
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    They really deserve what is coming to them.

    Assume the Blairites are never going to be in control again. Ever.

    So your choices are

    1. sing from the Corbyn hymn sheet and risk deselection by voter
    2. rebel and face deselection by party member.

    Either way you are getting deselected.
  • Options
    isam said:

    antifrank said:
    Beware the quiet ones
    Are they turning up the volume?

  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,008
    Danny565 said:

    Barnesian said:

    Majority of 62.

    So about 30-40 Labour MPs have abstained.

    Deselection o'clock.

    The govt would have been defeated if all Lab MPs did their job.
    How? The government has a majority of 12 and generally gets about 20 with support from DUP and SF abstention.
  • Options
    HaroldOHaroldO Posts: 1,185
    kle4 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Barnesian said:

    Majority of 62.

    So about 30-40 Labour MPs have abstained.

    Deselection o'clock.
    Oh come on, just for abstaining? That's not even a real rebellion.
    This is "The New Politics" remember.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @patrickwintour: Labour whips saying that fewer than 30 Labour MPs abstained on charter of budget responsibility admitting this was lower than expected.
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited October 2015
    kle4 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Barnesian said:

    Majority of 62.

    So about 30-40 Labour MPs have abstained.

    Deselection o'clock.
    Oh come on, just for abstaining? That's not even a real rebellion.
    But it amounts to the same thing when the majority is tiny, as we've seen today: the government got only 320 votes in favour, which is not an absolute majority.

    The point is if Labour MPs want to be independents who act freely from what activists want, then they can't then complain if those activists turn around and say "fine, but we'd prefer our money and effort go towards a Labour MP who fights for the aims we want".
  • Options
    flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    Pulpstar said:

    Danny565 said:

    Barnesian said:

    Majority of 62.

    So about 30-40 Labour MPs have abstained.

    Deselection o'clock.

    The govt would have been defeated if all Lab MPs did their job.
    Doubt that - pairings ?

    Also they're 65 short, not 40.
    This is clearly the maths behind Corbynomics.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,154
    Scott_P said:

    @patrickwintour: Labour whips saying that fewer than 30 Labour MPs abstained on charter of budget responsibility admitting this was lower than expected.

    Looks like the PLP is largely cowed by Corbyn already. He doesn't need to worry now.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,028
    Scott_P said:

    Normally The Apprentice is the most cringeworthy thing on TV, but it will have to go some to match that debate

    Excitedly copying and pasting tweets from a parliamentary debate as if it's a moon landing is quite cringeworthy, but the Apprentice will top it I'm sure
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,154
    Danny565 said:

    kle4 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Barnesian said:

    Majority of 62.

    So about 30-40 Labour MPs have abstained.

    Deselection o'clock.
    Oh come on, just for abstaining? That's not even a real rebellion.
    But it amounts to the same thing when the majority is tiny, as we've seen today: the government got only 320 votes in favour, which is not an absolute majority.
    You're assuming no pairs.
  • Options
    Barnesian said:

    Danny565 said:

    Barnesian said:

    Majority of 62.

    So about 30-40 Labour MPs have abstained.

    Deselection o'clock.

    The govt would have been defeated if all Lab MPs did their job.
    How? The government has a majority of 12 and generally gets about 20 with support from DUP and SF abstention.
    Except they only got 320 votes for the motion. Not even all of their MPs voted for it so it was clearly possible for it to be defeated.
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125
    Danny565 said:

    kle4 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Barnesian said:

    Majority of 62.

    So about 30-40 Labour MPs have abstained.

    Deselection o'clock.
    Oh come on, just for abstaining? That's not even a real rebellion.
    But it amounts to the same thing when the majority is tiny, as we've seen today: the government got only 320 votes in favour, which is not an absolute majority.

    The point is if Labour MPs want to be independents who act freely from what activists want, then they can't then complain if those activists turn around and say "fine, but we'd prefer our money and effort go towards a Labour MP who fights for the aims we want".
    You keep saying this stuff about de-selection and you're not completely stupid so I guess you must want some kind of implosion to bring this sorry mess to a swift end.
  • Options

    Danny565 said:

    kle4 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Barnesian said:

    Majority of 62.

    So about 30-40 Labour MPs have abstained.

    Deselection o'clock.
    Oh come on, just for abstaining? That's not even a real rebellion.
    But it amounts to the same thing when the majority is tiny, as we've seen today: the government got only 320 votes in favour, which is not an absolute majority.
    You're assuming no pairs.
    I thought pairing was normally not used for 3 line whips.
  • Options
    MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,320
    edited October 2015
    Danny565 said:

    Barnesian said:

    Majority of 62.

    So about 30-40 Labour MPs have abstained.

    The govt would have been defeated if all Lab MPs did their job.
    Nope.

    650 MPs
    4 SF not sworn in
    4 Speakers don't vote
    4 tellers don't vote

    So max number of votes that could be cast if every single (sworn in) MP was present = 638

    So 320 votes must win.
  • Options
    flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903

    Scott_P said:

    @patrickwintour: Labour whips saying that fewer than 30 Labour MPs abstained on charter of budget responsibility admitting this was lower than expected.

    Looks like the PLP is largely cowed by Corbyn already. He doesn't need to worry now.
    I'd agree. All round a brilliant day for Osborne. If as reported McDonnell was made to look stupid in the eyes of his backbenchers and they squirmingly did nothing then its a good day for the Tories. They can only hope for a few more of the same. The abstainers cannot be happy with the borderlines either.
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    MikeL said:

    Danny565 said:

    Barnesian said:

    Majority of 62.

    So about 30-40 Labour MPs have abstained.

    The govt would have been defeated if all Lab MPs did their job.
    Nope.

    650 MPs
    4 SF not sworn in
    4 Speakers don't vote
    4 tellers don't vote

    So max number of votes that could be cast if every single (sworn in) MP was present = 638

    So 320 votes must win.
    Ok, if that's the case then I stand corrected.

    However, it was still very close, for all those abstainers knew they could've been making the difference between the vote being won or lost, and there will be votes in future where they really would make the difference.

    And I'm saying this as someone in the right-wing half of the party who didn't put Corbyn as first preference, so you can imagine what the reaction will be with the majority!
  • Options
    flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    Danny565 said:

    MikeL said:

    Danny565 said:

    Barnesian said:

    Majority of 62.

    So about 30-40 Labour MPs have abstained.

    The govt would have been defeated if all Lab MPs did their job.
    Nope.

    650 MPs
    4 SF not sworn in
    4 Speakers don't vote
    4 tellers don't vote

    So max number of votes that could be cast if every single (sworn in) MP was present = 638

    So 320 votes must win.
    Ok, if that's the case then I stand corrected.

    However, it was still very close, for all those abstainers knew they could've been making the difference between the vote being won or lost, and there will be votes in future where they really would make the difference.

    And I'm saying this as someone in the right-wing half of the party who didn't put Corbyn as first preference, so you can imagine what the reaction will be with the majority!
    30 abstainers wouls have pushed the vote up to 288. Still well short of a potential win. Was there a 3 line govt whip? Very rarely do votes involve every single MP voting. There are always people unavailable for all sorts of legitimate reasons. This is especially true of the governing party.
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,064

    Scott_P said:

    @patrickwintour: Labour whips saying that fewer than 30 Labour MPs abstained on charter of budget responsibility admitting this was lower than expected.

    Looks like the PLP is largely cowed by Corbyn already. He doesn't need to worry now.
    Cowed? The whole thing is a load of nonsense. Why should Labour get dragged into Osborne's silly games? No previous British government has needed such a law and yet if you ignore having to fight wars the British government has a remarkable history of financial solvency.
  • Options
    saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    The Labour front bench must feel like the PBI, waiting to go over the top to be mown down in the wire before these interviews, it's painful to watch.

    The good tv interviewers must be licking their lips.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,699
    Pulpstar said:

    SeanT said:

    Harsh but entirely fair

    Mark Wallace @wallaceme
    Absolute must-watch - the whole interview with @RichardBurgon. He may as well have arrived in a clown car. https://twitter.com/stephenpollard/status/654377154541670400

    This brief interview probably has the most embarrassment-per-second* I have ever seen.

    EPS* - a new metric invented exclusively for the Corbyn Era.
    2:10 - Ending corporate welfare.

    Is there another U-turn coming on tax credits ?
    Did that guy know anything about his brief - I trying not to be partisan (!!!) - but that wasn't a car crash. That was the end of the Blues Brothers. With more police cars.

    As someone who correctly predicted the use of a major increase in the minimum wage and raising of the starting point of tax as the balance to cutting tax credits.... I reckon that the Chancellor will announce in the Autumn statement that he bringing forward the minimum wage increases to alleviate concerns over tax credits. That will be his "listening to the concerns of his back benchers" move.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Scott_P said:

    @patrickwintour: Labour whips saying that fewer than 30 Labour MPs abstained on charter of budget responsibility admitting this was lower than expected.

    I would like to know who those 30 MPs are unless specifically allowed to abstain or were paired.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,814
    The longer the PLP just do nothing about Corbyn the thicker they are.

    Democracy is failing though. Even the BBC are taking the piss out of Labour.
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    surbiton said:

    Scott_P said:

    @patrickwintour: Labour whips saying that fewer than 30 Labour MPs abstained on charter of budget responsibility admitting this was lower than expected.

    I would like to know who those 30 MPs are unless specifically allowed to abstain or were paired.
    They genuinely seem to think they have a God-given right to remain MPs forevermore, without any obligations to the activists who put them there. Unbelievable.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    Scott_P said:

    @patrickwintour: Labour whips saying that fewer than 30 Labour MPs abstained on charter of budget responsibility admitting this was lower than expected.

    Looks like the PLP is largely cowed by Corbyn already. He doesn't need to worry now.
    Cowed? The whole thing is a load of nonsense. Why should Labour get dragged into Osborne's silly games? No previous British government has needed such a law and yet if you ignore having to fight wars the British government has a remarkable history of financial solvency.
    What happens should a Chancellor fail to create a surplus in "good times" ?

    1. 1 year in prison for each £1bn of deficit

    2. A personal fine of 1% of the deficit

    3. One lash for each £1bn of deficit

    4. None of the above.

    What is the point of this farce ?
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    surbiton said:

    Scott_P said:

    @patrickwintour: Labour whips saying that fewer than 30 Labour MPs abstained on charter of budget responsibility admitting this was lower than expected.

    I would like to know who those 30 MPs are unless specifically allowed to abstain or were paired.
    How an MP votes, or doesn't, is not a secret so you will be able to find out, probably tomorrow, by the wonders of the Internet. Having found out what do you plan to do with the information?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,086
    Danny565 said:

    surbiton said:

    Scott_P said:

    @patrickwintour: Labour whips saying that fewer than 30 Labour MPs abstained on charter of budget responsibility admitting this was lower than expected.

    I would like to know who those 30 MPs are unless specifically allowed to abstain or were paired.
    They genuinely seem to think they have a God-given right to remain MPs forevermore, without any obligations to the activists who put them there. Unbelievable.
    But maybe the activists in their own area want them to do what they just did, maybe their local party is not on board with Corbyn and company? What should they do in that situation?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,443
    The Conservatives were always going to win tonight, just like Brown used to win when his idiocies were pushed through by mindless back benchers who had no idea what he was talking about. This is one of the reasons why politics does not tempt sane people. For me, opposition would be like going into every court case knowing you were going to lose. What on earth is the point or job satisfaction in that?

    So the point of tonight was not the government victory but how many Labour MPs were willing to hold their nose and support the absolute tosh produced by McConnell. And the answer is damn near 200 of them. They should be ashamed of themselves. Unless they are willing to act their party is going to die. But they are pathetic.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Omnium said:

    The longer the PLP just do nothing about Corbyn the thicker they are.

    Democracy is failing though. Even the BBC are taking the piss out of Labour.

    The BBC is the Establishment. They are Tories.
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,556
    edited October 2015
    HaroldO said:

    Those eyebrows are haunting.

    He's so out of his depth it is excruciating to watch. I honestly think Cathy Newman cut it short there to let him go before he lost all dignity. I guess this Burgon fella was one of the last to be appointed after several dozen other MPs turned down the job.

    Ah I see he was one of the idiots that nominated Corbyn! :D
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    DavidL said:

    The Conservatives were always going to win tonight, just like Brown used to win when his idiocies were pushed through by mindless back benchers who had no idea what he was talking about.
    .

    But that was when Labour had much bigger majorities than 12. A parliament of this kind hasn't happened since the 1992-97 parliament (when I'm fairly sure even Tony Blair would've opposed Tea Party-esque lunacy like Osborne's stunt today).
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,556
    Danny565 said:

    surbiton said:

    Scott_P said:

    @patrickwintour: Labour whips saying that fewer than 30 Labour MPs abstained on charter of budget responsibility admitting this was lower than expected.

    I would like to know who those 30 MPs are unless specifically allowed to abstain or were paired.
    They genuinely seem to think they have a God-given right to remain MPs forevermore, without any obligations to the activists who put them there. Unbelievable.
    Their obligation is to the voters in their parliamentary seat, the activists can take a hike.
  • Options
    RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 2,978
    I don't think Ive seen a more shambolic shadow chancellor. The charter was the same two weeks ago when he supported it, and it is the same now he's rejected it. I also thought McDonnell verged on rude for the most part, having to remind himself to 'be nice.'

    There's some genuine issues that need strong opposition, tax credits being one. I have no faith in labour being coherent enough to hold the government to account. I wonder if Labour MPs on the most part are genuinely feeling the heat from the corbynistas.
  • Options
    saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    surbiton said:

    Omnium said:

    The longer the PLP just do nothing about Corbyn the thicker they are.

    Democracy is failing though. Even the BBC are taking the piss out of Labour.

    The BBC is the Establishment. They are Tories.
    They are actually blairites, you didn't think they were going to take Corbyn lying down did you?

    It's really very funny now that the BBC, has ceased to cheer lead for you that you suddenly feel they are biased.

    How long before you start demanding abolition of the licence fee?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,443
    Danny565 said:

    DavidL said:

    The Conservatives were always going to win tonight, just like Brown used to win when his idiocies were pushed through by mindless back benchers who had no idea what he was talking about.
    .

    But that was when Labour had much bigger majorities than 12. A parliament of this kind hasn't happened since the 1992-97 parliament (when I'm fairly sure even Tony Blair would've opposed Tea Party-esque lunacy like Osborne's stunt today).
    Remember when he was shadow City Minister? About the time of black Wednesday? He sounded vastly more authoritative than the shell shocked ministers trying to explain what on earth had happened to them.

    The comparison with that muppet tonight is not only painful for the Labour party, it is painful for our democracy.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    Cyclefree said:



    https://barnabasfund.org/news/Syrian-Christian-captives-crucified-for-refusing-to-deny-Christ-but-another-Christian-leader-is-released

    Some of the most persecuted are the middle east Christians. They often take shelter in homes and Churches rather than official camps, as these are often also quite persecutory. Taking just from official camps would exclude them.

    Barnabas fund is supporting safe havens, with the support of some prominent clergy:

    https://barnabasfund.org/osh

    My apologies, I wasn't referring just to official camps necessarily - in fact I was not even aware there were official and unofficial camps. If you note I made no mention of 'official' camps in my original posting. It is not beyond the wit of those organising airlifts of refugees into the UK to make sure that as many people as possible get an equal chance to be considered. What is important is that the refugees are taken from camps in the countries bordering the war zone rather than accepted once they have taken up the offer of the smugglers and made dangerous journeys into the heart of Europe.
    The Archbishop has been directly raising the issue with the PM:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11860902/Archbishop-warns-Cameron-over-Syrian-refugees.html

    Syrian Christians are least likely to be able to return to their homes, least safe in refugee camps (as these are often Islamist recruiting gounds) and most likely to assimilate here. To me it is a no-brainer to give them priority over the young men in Calais.
    Absolutely agree. Lord Weidenfeld is raising money to help persecuted Christians in the Middle East.

    (BTW I hope to be at the next PB meet.)

    I agree, however the downside might make them an even more persecuted group. It would be sad to see us throw in the towel on Christianity in the mid east, but if we could take them all then we should.
    The sectarian divide would of course be ever wider.
    The Christians were perfectly safe until 2003 when we decided to play God !
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    BBC reporting 20 Labour MPs "defying". Did they do a dance of death ?
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,699
    surbiton said:

    Cyclefree said:



    https://barnabasfund.org/news/Syrian-Christian-captives-crucified-for-refusing-to-deny-Christ-but-another-Christian-leader-is-released

    Some of the most persecuted are the middle east Christians. They often take shelter in homes and Churches rather than official camps, as these are often also quite persecutory. Taking just from official camps would exclude them.

    Barnabas fund is supporting safe havens, with the support of some prominent clergy:

    https://barnabasfund.org/osh

    My apologies, I wasn't referring just to official camps necessarily - in fact I was not even aware there were official and unofficial camps. If you note I made no mention of 'official' camps in my original posting. It is not beyond the wit of those organising airlifts of refugees into the UK to make sure that as many people as possible get an equal chance to be considered. What is important is that the refugees are taken from camps in the countries bordering the war zone rather than accepted once they have taken up the offer of the smugglers and made dangerous journeys into the heart of Europe.
    The Archbishop has been directly raising the issue with the PM:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11860902/Archbishop-warns-Cameron-over-Syrian-refugees.html

    Syrian Christians are least likely to be able to return to their homes, least safe in refugee camps (as these are often Islamist recruiting gounds) and most likely to assimilate here. To me it is a no-brainer to give them priority over the young men in Calais.
    Absolutely agree. Lord Weidenfeld is raising money to help persecuted Christians in the Middle East.

    (BTW I hope to be at the next PB meet.)

    I agree, however the downside might make them an even more persecuted group. It would be sad to see us throw in the towel on Christianity in the mid east, but if we could take them all then we should.
    The sectarian divide would of course be ever wider.
    The Christians were perfectly safe until 2003 when we decided to play God !
    You haven't really travelled very much in the Middle East, have you?
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125
    surbiton said:

    Omnium said:

    The longer the PLP just do nothing about Corbyn the thicker they are.

    Democracy is failing though. Even the BBC are taking the piss out of Labour.

    The BBC is the Establishment. They are Tories.
    Hahahahaha now we've heard almost all - surely you mean 'Tory scum'?
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    In the last 25 years, there have been only 2 years when spending was less than revenue earned.

    Both Labour years !
  • Options
    20 or was it more?

    Paul Waugh ✔ @paulwaugh
    Tory sources:.37 Labour MPs abstained, of which 9 were paired and that means 28 abstained without being paired in advance.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,699
    surbiton said:

    Scott_P said:

    @patrickwintour: Labour whips saying that fewer than 30 Labour MPs abstained on charter of budget responsibility admitting this was lower than expected.

    Looks like the PLP is largely cowed by Corbyn already. He doesn't need to worry now.
    Cowed? The whole thing is a load of nonsense. Why should Labour get dragged into Osborne's silly games? No previous British government has needed such a law and yet if you ignore having to fight wars the British government has a remarkable history of financial solvency.
    What happens should a Chancellor fail to create a surplus in "good times" ?

    1. 1 year in prison for each £1bn of deficit

    2. A personal fine of 1% of the deficit

    3. One lash for each £1bn of deficit

    4. None of the above.

    What is the point of this farce ?
    There are quite a few legal requirements without penalties. It is interesting to see how much of EU stuff is a legal requirement without teeth for example.
  • Options
    MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    surbiton said:

    Cyclefree said:



    https://barnabasfund.org/news/Syrian-Christian-captives-crucified-for-refusing-to-deny-Christ-but-another-Christian-leader-is-released

    Some of the most persecuted are the middle east Christians. They often take shelter in homes and Churches rather than official camps, as these are often also quite persecutory. Taking just from official camps would exclude them.

    Barnabas fund is supporting safe havens, with the support of some prominent clergy:

    https://barnabasfund.org/osh

    My apologies, I wasn't referring just to official camps necessarily - in fact I was not even aware there were official and unofficial camps. If you note I made no mention of 'official' camps in my original posting. It is not beyond the wit of those organising airlifts of refugees into the UK to make sure that as many people as possible get an equal chance to be considered. What is important is that the refugees are taken from camps in the countries bordering the war zone rather than accepted once they have taken up the offer of the smugglers and made dangerous journeys into the heart of Europe.
    The Archbishop has been directly raising the issue with the PM:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11860902/Archbishop-warns-Cameron-over-Syrian-refugees.html

    Syrian Christians are least likely to be able to return to their homes, least safe in refugee camps (as these are often Islamist recruiting gounds) and most likely to assimilate here. To me it is a no-brainer to give them priority over the young men in Calais.
    Absolutely agree. Lord Weidenfeld is raising money to help persecuted Christians in the Middle East.

    (BTW I hope to be at the next PB meet.)

    I agree, however the downside might make them an even more persecuted group. It would be sad to see us throw in the towel on Christianity in the mid east, but if we could take them all then we should.
    The sectarian divide would of course be ever wider.
    The Christians were perfectly safe until 2003 when we decided to play God !
    They were only tolerated because they did not dare rise above their station.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    surbiton said:

    Cyclefree said:



    https://barnabasfund.org/news/Syrian-Christian-captives-crucified-for-refusing-to-deny-Christ-but-another-Christian-leader-is-released

    Some of the most persecuted are the middle east Christians. They often take shelter in homes and Churches rather than official camps, as these are often also quite persecutory. Taking just from official camps would exclude them.

    Barnabas fund is supporting safe havens, with the support of some prominent clergy:

    https://barnabasfund.org/osh

    My apologies, I wasn't referring just to official camps necessarily - in fact I was not even aware there were official and unofficial camps. If you note I made no mention of 'official' camps in my original posting. It is not beyond the wit of those organising airlifts of refugees into the UK to make sure that as many people as possible get an equal chance to be considered. What is important is that the refugees are taken from camps in the countries bordering the war zone rather than accepted once they have taken up the offer of the smugglers and made dangerous journeys into the heart of Europe.
    The Archbishop has been directly raising the issue with the PM:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11860902/Archbishop-warns-Cameron-over-Syrian-refugees.html

    Syrian Christians are least likely to be able to return to their homes, least safe in refugee camps (as these are often Islamist recruiting gounds) and most likely to assimilate here. To me it is a no-brainer to give them priority over the young men in Calais.
    Absolutely agree. Lord Weidenfeld is raising money to help persecuted Christians in the Middle East.

    (BTW I hope to be at the next PB meet.)

    I agree, however the downside might make them an even more persecuted group. It would be sad to see us throw in the towel on Christianity in the mid east, but if we could take them all then we should.
    The sectarian divide would of course be ever wider.
    The Christians were perfectly safe until 2003 when we decided to play God !
    You haven't really travelled very much in the Middle East, have you?
    About twice a year !
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125
    surbiton said:

    BBC reporting 20 Labour MPs "defying". Did they do a dance of death ?

    hahahahahaha - wtf does that mean?
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    glw said:

    Danny565 said:

    surbiton said:

    Scott_P said:

    @patrickwintour: Labour whips saying that fewer than 30 Labour MPs abstained on charter of budget responsibility admitting this was lower than expected.

    I would like to know who those 30 MPs are unless specifically allowed to abstain or were paired.
    They genuinely seem to think they have a God-given right to remain MPs forevermore, without any obligations to the activists who put them there. Unbelievable.
    Their obligation is to the voters in their parliamentary seat, the activists can take a hike.
    We'll see when they finance their own re-election as an independents. How many knock on doors for traitors ?
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125

    20 or was it more?

    Paul Waugh ✔ @paulwaugh
    Tory sources:.37 Labour MPs abstained, of which 9 were paired and that means 28 abstained without being paired in advance.

    Someone, somewhere can't add up - now who could it be???
  • Options
    FensterFenster Posts: 2,115
    Earlier on I commented that Corbyn did well at PMQS. Credit where due and all that. But I suggested him doing well was largely moot because the whole shadow cabinet operation is largely pathetic.

    After watching the C4 Burgon interview you get a sense of the scale of Labour's problem. He was absolutely woeful. In fact, he was unprepared and plain fucking stupid. It's not good enough and Labour grassroots workers deserve better.
  • Options
    felix said:

    20 or was it more?

    Paul Waugh ✔ @paulwaugh
    Tory sources:.37 Labour MPs abstained, of which 9 were paired and that means 28 abstained without being paired in advance.

    Someone, somewhere can't add up - now who could it be???
    It was going to be 60, then 20, now back up...
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,154

    20 or was it more?

    Paul Waugh ✔ @paulwaugh
    Tory sources:.37 Labour MPs abstained, of which 9 were paired and that means 28 abstained without being paired in advance.

    So there is pairing on a 3-line Whip....
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,699
    Danny565 said:

    DavidL said:

    The Conservatives were always going to win tonight, just like Brown used to win when his idiocies were pushed through by mindless back benchers who had no idea what he was talking about.
    .

    But that was when Labour had much bigger majorities than 12. A parliament of this kind hasn't happened since the 1992-97 parliament (when I'm fairly sure even Tony Blair would've opposed Tea Party-esque lunacy like Osborne's stunt today).
    So Maynard Keynes was a pre-Tea Party member of the Tea Party? His idea was to pay down debt and run a surplus in the good times, so that when the inevitable happened (a) the surplus would absorb some of the shock of the loss of revenue and (b) there would be a capacity to borrow (low deficit) to boost the economy.

    It's funny how the left rediscover Keynes every time the economy dips, but can't remember his name during a boom.
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 11,535
    From the Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11930309/Fiscal-charter-Labour-rebellion-live.html

    "Around 20 Labour MPs abstained from the vote, including around half a dozen shadow ministers.

    One shadow minister said he was threatened with the sack after saying he would not oppose the charter on Tuesday morning, only to be given "authorised absence".

    The minister said: "It's f*****g chaos. I said I wasn't voting today and they said I would get sacked. This afternoon they said will you just stay away. I said fair enough. They then told me I've got authorised absence. I'm going for dinner tonight instead."

    ...

    The vote came as Mr Corbyn suffered yet more indecision.

    He was said to be undecided over whether or not to wear White Tie to a state banquet next week, which will be hosted by the Queen in honour of the Chinese President. "

    'Undecided over whether to wear a white tie'? Good grief. It must be exhausting having a conscience as ferocious as Jeremy's.


  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    felix said:

    20 or was it more?

    Paul Waugh ✔ @paulwaugh
    Tory sources:.37 Labour MPs abstained, of which 9 were paired and that means 28 abstained without being paired in advance.

    Someone, somewhere can't add up - now who could it be???
    http://www.itv.com/news/update/2015-10-14/20-labour-mps-defied-party-and-abstained-in-fiscal-vote/

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34524078
  • Options
    Fenster said:

    Earlier on I commented that Corbyn did well at PMQS. Credit where due and all that. But I suggested him doing well was largely moot because the whole shadow cabinet operation is largely pathetic.

    After watching the C4 Burgon interview you get a sense of the scale of Labour's problem. He was absolutely woeful. In fact, he was unprepared and plain fucking stupid. It's not good enough and Labour grassroots workers deserve better.

    Dan Hodges ✔ @DPJHodges
    Richard Burgon. Channel 4 news. I'm just leaving this one hanging there...
  • Options
    perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    surbiton said:

    In the last 25 years, there have been only 2 years when spending was less than revenue earned.

    Both Labour years !

    That would be the early years of the last Labour government when they were following Tory policies and inheritance.

  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    surbiton said:

    Cyclefree said:



    https://barnabasfund.org/news/Syrian-Christian-captives-crucified-for-refusing-to-deny-Christ-but-another-Christian-leader-is-released

    Some of the most persecuted are the middle east Christians. They often take shelter in homes and Churches rather than official camps, as these are often also quite persecutory. Taking just from official camps would exclude them.

    Barnabas fund is supporting safe havens, with the support of some prominent clergy:

    https://barnabasfund.org/osh

    My apologies, I wasn't referring just to official camps necessarily - in fact I was not even aware there were official and unofficial camps. If you note I made no mention of 'official' camps in my original posting. It is not beyond the wit of those organising airlifts of refugees into the UK to make sure that as many people as possible get an equal chance to be considered. What is important is that the refugees are taken from camps in the countries bordering the war zone rather than accepted once they have taken up the offer of the smugglers and made dangerous journeys into the heart of Europe.
    The Archbishop has been directly raising the issue with the PM:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11860902/Archbishop-warns-Cameron-over-Syrian-refugees.html

    Syrian Christians are least likely to be able to return to their homes, least safe in refugee camps (as these are often Islamist recruiting gounds) and most likely to assimilate here. To me it is a no-brainer to give them priority over the young men in Calais.
    Absolutely agree. Lord Weidenfeld is raising money to help persecuted Christians in the Middle East.

    (BTW I hope to be at the next PB meet.)

    I agree, however the downside might make them an even more persecuted group. It would be sad to see us throw in the towel on Christianity in the mid east, but if we could take them all then we should.
    The sectarian divide would of course be ever wider.
    The Christians were perfectly safe until 2003 when we decided to play God !
    FWIW, I'm involved with the Anglican & Eastern Churches Association (my local church is responsible for Anglican relations with the Orthodox community).

    I can tell you, categorically, that your post is utter bollocks.
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125
    The official rebel list - acc. to Labour:

    Fiona Mactaggart
    Rushanara Ali
    ​​​Ian Austin
    Ben Bradshaw
    Adrian Bailey
    Shabana Mahmood
    Ann Coffey
    ​​​​Andrew Smith
    Simon Danczuk
    Jamie Reed
    Chris Evans
    ​​​​Graham Stringer
    ​​​​Frank Field
    ​​​Gisela Stuart
    ​​​​Mike Gapes
    ​​​​Margaret Hodge
    Tristram Hunt
    ​​​​​Graham Jones​​​​
    ​​​​​Helen Jones
    ​​​​​Liz Kendall
    ​​​​​Chris Leslie
  • Options
    surbiton said:

    In the last 25 years, there have been only 2 years when spending was less than revenue earned.

    Both Labour years !

    When they followed Tory spending plans.

  • Options
    felix said:

    The official rebel list - acc. to Labour:

    Fiona Mactaggart
    Rushanara Ali
    ​​​Ian Austin
    Ben Bradshaw
    Adrian Bailey
    Shabana Mahmood
    Ann Coffey
    ​​​​Andrew Smith
    Simon Danczuk
    Jamie Reed
    Chris Evans
    ​​​​Graham Stringer
    ​​​​Frank Field
    ​​​Gisela Stuart
    ​​​​Mike Gapes
    ​​​​Margaret Hodge
    Tristram Hunt
    ​​​​​Graham Jones​​​​
    ​​​​​Helen Jones
    ​​​​​Liz Kendall
    ​​​​​Chris Leslie

    Chukkadidarunner?
  • Options
    felix said:

    The official rebel list - acc. to Labour:

    Fiona Mactaggart
    Rushanara Ali
    ​​​Ian Austin
    Ben Bradshaw
    Adrian Bailey
    Shabana Mahmood
    Ann Coffey
    ​​​​Andrew Smith
    Simon Danczuk
    Jamie Reed
    Chris Evans
    ​​​​Graham Stringer
    ​​​​Frank Field
    ​​​Gisela Stuart
    ​​​​Mike Gapes
    ​​​​Margaret Hodge
    Tristram Hunt
    ​​​​​Graham Jones​​​​
    ​​​​​Helen Jones
    ​​​​​Liz Kendall
    ​​​​​Chris Leslie

    21?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,443
    Anyone doubting the difference should watch this interview embedded in this article:

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/edmundconway/100004814/a-prime-minister-who-knows-something-about-the-economy/

    And if you are Labour weep.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Cookie said:

    From the Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11930309/Fiscal-charter-Labour-rebellion-live.html

    "Around 20 Labour MPs abstained from the vote, including around half a dozen shadow ministers.

    One shadow minister said he was threatened with the sack after saying he would not oppose the charter on Tuesday morning, only to be given "authorised absence".

    The minister said: "It's f*****g chaos. I said I wasn't voting today and they said I would get sacked. This afternoon they said will you just stay away. I said fair enough. They then told me I've got authorised absence. I'm going for dinner tonight instead."

    ...

    The vote came as Mr Corbyn suffered yet more indecision.

    He was said to be undecided over whether or not to wear White Tie to a state banquet next week, which will be hosted by the Queen in honour of the Chinese President. "

    'Undecided over whether to wear a white tie'? Good grief. It must be exhausting having a conscience as ferocious as Jeremy's.

    He should wear a lounge suit. What would the Chinese President be wearing ?

  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,913
    felix said:

    The official rebel list - acc. to Labour:

    Fiona Mactaggart
    Rushanara Ali
    ​​​Ian Austin
    Ben Bradshaw
    Adrian Bailey
    Shabana Mahmood
    Ann Coffey
    ​​​​Andrew Smith
    Simon Danczuk
    Jamie Reed
    Chris Evans
    ​​​​Graham Stringer
    ​​​​Frank Field
    ​​​Gisela Stuart
    ​​​​Mike Gapes
    ​​​​Margaret Hodge
    Tristram Hunt
    ​​​​​Graham Jones​​​​
    ​​​​​Helen Jones
    ​​​​​Liz Kendall
    ​​​​​Chris Leslie

    Surprised not to see Jeremy Corbyn on the rebels list.
Sign In or Register to comment.